Do
you like Cheese Whiz? Spray tan?
Fake eyelashes?
;">That's what is Lorem Ipsum to
many — it rubs them the wrong way, all the way. It's unreal, uncanny, makes you
wonder if something is wrong, it seems to seek your attention for all the wrong
reasons. Usually, we prefer the real thing, wine without sulfur based
preservatives, real butter, not margarine, and so we'd like our layouts and
designs to be filled with real words, with thoughts that count, information
that has value. The toppings you may chose for that TV dinner pizza slice when
you forgot to shop for foods, the paint you may slap on your face to impress
the new boss is your business. But what about your daily bread? Design comps,
layouts, wireframes — will your clients accept that you go about things the
facile way? Authorities in our business will tell in no uncertain terms that
Lorem Ipsum is that huge, huge no no to forswear forever. Not so fast, I'd say,
there are some redeeming factors in favor of greeking text, as its use is
merely the symptom of a worse problem to take into consideration.
"You begin with a text, you sculpt information, you chisel away what's not needed, you come to the point, make things clear, add value, you're a content person, you like words. Design is noafterthought, far from it, but it comes in a deserved second. Anyway, you still use Lorem Ipsum and rightly so, as it will always have a place in the web workers toolbox, as things happen, not always the way you like it, not always in the preferred order. Even if your less into design and more into content strategy you may find some redeeming value with, wait for it, dummy copy, no less."
Consider
this: You made all the required mock ups for commissioned layout, got all the
approvals, built a tested code base or had them built, you decided on a content
management system, got a license for it or adapted open source software for
your client's needs. Then the question arises: where's the content? Not there
yet? That's not so bad, there's dummy copy to the rescue. But worse, what if the
fish doesn't fit in the can, the foot's to big for the boot? Or to small? To
short sentences, to many headings, images too large for the proposed design, or
too small, or they fit in but it looks iffy for reasons the folks in the
meeting can't quite tell right now, but they're unhappy, somehow. A client
that's unhappy for a reason is a problem, a client that's unhappy though he or
her can't quite put a finger on it is worse.
But.
A big but: Lorem Ipsum is not t the root of the problem, it just shows what's
going wrong. Chances are there wasn't collaboration, communication, and
checkpoints, there wasn't a process agreed upon or specified with the
granularity required. It's content strategy gone awry right from the start.
Forswearing the use of Lorem Ipsum wouldn't have helped, won't help now. It's
like saying you're a bad designer, use less bold text, don't use italics in
every other paragraph. True enough, but that's not all that it takes to get
things back on track.
So
Lorem Ipsum is bad (not necessarily)
There's lot of hate out there for a text that amounts to little more than
garbled words in an old language. The villagers are out there with a vengeance
to get that Frankenstein, wielding torches and pitchforks, wanting to tar and
feather it at the least, running it out of town in shame.
One
of the villagers, Kristina Halvorson from Adaptive Path, holds steadfastly to
the notion that design can’t be tested without real content:
I’ve
heard the argument that “lorem ipsum” is effective in wireframing or design because
it helps people focus on the actual layout, or color scheme, or whatever. What
kills me here is that we’re talking about creating a user experience that will
(whether we like it or not) be DRIVEN by words. The entire structure of the
page or app flow is FOR THE WORDS.
If
that's what you think how bout the other way around? How can you evaluate
content without design? No typography, no colors, no layout, no styles, all
those things that convey the important signals that go beyond the mere textual,
hierarchies of information, weight, emphasis, oblique stresses, priorities, all
those subtle cues that also have visual and emotional appeal to the reader.
Rigid proponents of content strategy may shun the use of dummy copy but then
designers might want to ask them to provide style sheets with the copy decks
they supply that are in tune with the design direction they require.
Or
else, an alternative route: set checkpoints, networks, processes, junctions
between content and layout. Depending on the state of affairs it may be fine to
concentrate either on design or content, reversing gears when needed.
Or
maybe not. How about this: build in appropriate intersections and checkpoints
between design and content. Accept that it’s sometimes okay to focus just on
the content or just on the design.
Luke
Wroblewski, currently a Product Director at Google, holds that fake data can
break down in real life:
Using
dummy content or fake information in the Web design process can result in
products with unrealistic assumptions and potentially serious design flaws. A
seemingly elegant design can quickly begin to bloat with unexpected content or
break under the weight of actual activity.